Summary: Mrs X complained the Council discriminated against her children by refusing them access to a Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) scheme. We found no fault with the way the Council made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council refused her children access to a Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) scheme. She said they were discriminated against for having elective home education (EHE).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Funding for Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) schemes

6. Guidance for councils about HAF programmes says that funding for these schemes is primarily for school aged children who receive benefits-related free school meals (FSM).
7. Councils have discretion to use up to 15% of their funding to provide free or subsidised holiday club places for children who are not in receipt of benefits-related FSMs but who the council believe could benefit from HAF. In deciding which, if any, children should benefit from the 15% flexible funding, councils should ensure that these places are aligned to their local priorities. (Holiday activities and food programme 2025)

Benefits-related free school meals (FSM)

8. The guidance on FSMs states that “a pupil is only eligible to receive a free school meal when a claim for the meal has been made on their behalf and their eligibility, or protected status, has been verified by the school where they are enrolled or by the local authority.” (Free school meals, Guidance for local authorities, maintained schools, academies and free schools, June 2025)
9. This guidance makes provision for councils to consider FSMs for children who would meet the benefits-related criteria for FSMs but are receiving education otherwise than at school in circumstances where it would be ‘inappropriate’ for the provision to be made in school. The guidance states this is distinct from elective home education (EHE).

Elective home education (EHE)

10. Government guidance clearly states that EHE requires parents to take full responsibility for their child’s education, including all associated costs. Support provided by councils for children in EHE is discretionary. (All you need to know about home-schooling and elective home education (EHE) 2020)

The Council’s HAF policy

11. The Council’s policy on HAF funding states that the scheme is “for children and young people in Reception to Year 11 who receive benefits-related free school meals.” It also states there are no public discretionary places, and benefit-related FSMs is the only eligibility criteria used for the scheme.

What happened

12. Mrs X complained to the Council that her children had been refused places on a HAF playscheme in her area because they were not enrolled at a school and did not receive FSMs. She said she offered to provide alternative proof of low income, but the Council still refused. She said the Council discriminated against her children for receiving EHE.
13. The Council responded to Mrs X explaining the government guidance on HAF scheme and FSMs. It said its policy is not to offer any discretionary places to children not in receipt of FSMs.

Analysis

14. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
15. I have considered the steps the Council took to consider Mrs X’s complaint, and the information it took account of when deciding to refuse her children access to a HAF scheme. The government gives councils wide discretion to decide how to allocate up to 15% of the relevant funding. It does not oblige councils to make provision for children not in receipt of FSMs. While I understand Mrs X’s disappointment, there is no evidence of fault in how it took the decision. I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong and find no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Decision

16. I have completed my investigation and find no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman